If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the forum FAQ and the House Rules and Forum Guidelines.
You will have to register before you can post. If you find your registration is rejected, please try again using a different username. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Suggestions for future versions
Individual ideas on one subject should still be posted in the wishlist thread, however if you want to discuss your idea with others please create your own thread. Please name your topics sensibly and give an indication of what it is about.
For general ideas or a list please use this Wishlist topic. You can view some older suggestions here

-10 was allocated to him because of the fact that he has spent such a long time out injured and so the researchers couldn't determine a definite PA. This means that he will be given a PA from 170-200 upon starting a new game.

That he was ever given -10 is ridiculous. The Arsenal user can train that guy into the best CM in the world, which he clearly never would have been. He's got a worse PA than Bale now(?who's PA is too high aswell I admit).

The reasearchers are volunteers who do the job under guidelines and information/ review of the head researchers , so dont need this type of personal attack.

You've sacked researchers in the past haven't you? The Portuguese guy who made To Madeira. The Lazio/Cisco Roma researcher that also made up some players. So surely you're able to get rid of a researcher when they don't do their job properly. To be honest I think SI would do well to make the research team in general a more professional operation (obviously not paying each individual researcher, but perhaps hold them to higher standards, and have a team to iron out any mistakes they might make). I'm sorry but the mere fact that Ramsey can become the best player in the World on FM 12 just really should not be tolerated.

I am sure that reserachers are replaced if they break the guidelines given,, but much of their other input about player attributes and potential is a judgement, based on their opinion, which is usually given becaus of an in depth knowledge of the team and players involved. This opinion is already seen by other researchers and SI staff so unless it is quite blatantly an error, will be subject to one users opinion over another- so who is to say what is right and wrong, if it opinion only and not a fact? If users think that any opinion is incorrect, they can raise this in the Data Issues thread along with documentation to support their view and this will be considered by the research team at review time. By all means raise your concerns about any issue, but please do not reduce it to personal criticism of the researchers

With the case of Aaron Ramsey, he was seen before his leg break as a -10 PA player. Potentially a world beater. Then the leg break at Stoke happened and for the next edition he was given the same rating, simply because nobody can really say how he would recover as by that time he hadn't played. You can't make changes just on assumptions, you need to see the player play. Now that he's returned and played more often, it has been concluded that he is less likely to become a world class CM and his PA has been adjusted accordingly. That's how I see the whole thing.

I'd argue that his original -10 PA was very optimistic before the injury.

This is an unqualified subjective opinion but I do tend to think that the English club researchers above all other nations in the game & in particular those of the top teams can get a little carried away when assessing the PA of young players, the problem is that it is almost impossible to call people out on it.

Why can't he become the best player in the world? He's playing for one of the best teams in England. He's young. Has a very bright future.

Nobody here, or could possibly know what his future has in store for him.

There have been players that didn't have a burst in their Curent Ability in the past. Ian Wright and David Platt both blossomed around 23 or 24 years of age.

It would be a tragedy if young players currently getting first team football in the best teams in the world NEVER had the potential to become the best players in the world.

Oh please. Do you really believe that Ramsey has the potential ability to become as good as Xavi or Iniesta? He will go onto become a good player (baring any more major injuries), do well for Arsenal or whatever team he plays for in the future, but he will never be one of the top 10 players in the world.

Pro-consumer, anti-DRM. Never be satisfied with any answer. Dig until you drop.

Posts

6,670

Originally Posted by davehanson

Oh please. Do you really believe that Ramsey has the potential ability to become as good as Xavi or Iniesta? He will go onto become a good player (baring any more major injuries), do well for Arsenal or whatever team he plays for in the future, but he will never be one of the top 10 players in the world.

What about Claude Makele - he played with Celta Vigo and was largely unknown until he signed for Real Madrid, at the age of 27. Then joining Chelsea for 16.5m at the age of 31. Undoubtly one of the best central midfielders of his generation.

He stood out in the Real Madrid side as one of the best in Spain - that's playing alongside Zinédine Zidane, Luís Figo, Raúl, Ronaldo, Roberto Carlos, Steve McManaman, and Guti.

Still not good enough reason to give a young player a high PA?

What about Forlan, Berbatov, Wright, Platt.

Tony Adams was 23 before he became an unstoppable force for Arsenal's defence.

Luca Toni?

Ferenc?

Stanley Matthews?

ALL players who had the potential to become world class players - and did so fairly late in their careers.

There's no reason why a young player cannot have the potential to be the best player in the world.

There is nothing to say that Ramsey will not become the best player in the world in 4 or 5 years time.

And there's nothing to guarantee that he will - he could just as well turn out to be an average Joe.

And the game reflects this - by giving him a random PA of 170 - 200 at the start of each game.

Makele was unheralded in his early career because his abilities didn't fit with the style of play, there's a reason why the deep holding midfield role is referred to as the Makele role.

Ian Wright was passed by because he lacked discipline, once he grew up his talent for scoring goals came to the fore but he did get a lucky break in signing for Crystal Palace.

Forlan had an excellent record as soon as he left Manchester United & moved to more a more familiar culture, he wasn't too bad before the move to United either.

Berbatov was considered a very good talent in his early 20's, wiki has him scoring 16 goals in a season as a 20 year old at B.Leverkusen & he managed the feat twice at Sofia as a scrawny teenager, definite late bloomer there.

Tony Adams was at the time the youngest ever captain of Arsenal so hardly a late bloomer.

Luca Toni? You're having a laugh.

Stanley Matthews & I assume you're referring to Puskas, both true legends of the game & are players from a very different era which is exemplified by the fact Matthews was still playing at the age of 50, neither however were late bloomers.

btw I don't disagree that some players reach the top tier of the game later in their careers, you just picked some really, really bad examples.

I will give you David Platt as a fairly good example although I do not think he was that old in 1990 & is a better examlpe of one club missing his talent at a young age.

Pro-consumer, anti-DRM. Never be satisfied with any answer. Dig until you drop.

Posts

6,670

Luca Toni isn't a joke. He was a fairly average Serie A striker until 2004, when his goal tallies then skyrocketed to 30 in 47, 21 in 36, 33 in 42 and 16 in 29, earning him a move to Bayern Munich, where he scored 39 in 46. If that isn't a late-bloomer, then I don't know what it is.

The reason I scoffed at Luca Toni is that Italian clubs have a history of holding back their youth players, unless you're a truly prodigious talent the chances of breaking into a Serie A side before you're 23/24 was & still is quite low.

Originally Posted by Eugene Tyson

I did not - I picked the best examples.

Some players reach the top of their game, some do it early, some do it late, some do it for a small span of their career.

Like Ronaldinho, clearly one of the best players ever, until he suddenly stopped being great before he even turned 30.

The whole point was - some players who were not really on peoples radars, either young, or later on in their careers, suddenly were at the top of the world of footballers.

You're post came across as if you were using those players as examples of people who bumbled about before their careers took off in their late 20's.

Sorry if I misunderstood the context of what you wrote although most of the players you mentioned were at the top of their game for their entire career.

Stanley Mathews didn't win his first major honours until 1953 - when he was 38.

FWA Footballer of the Year: 1948, 1963

European Footballer of the Year: 1956

That's extremely late in your career to be winning world best players awards.

I think a certain little scuffle that got out of hand stalled a good part of Matthew's career & I'm not sure how much early the awards you mention were given out.

We'll agree to disagree on Luca Toni.

Wiki update: Matthews was the first ever winner of the European Footballer of the Year & Football Writer's Footballer of the Year awards, talk about trying to portray the facts in a way to suit your position & of course his lack of winners medals is largely down to the way people approached a career in football before the 1960's.

Pro-consumer, anti-DRM. Never be satisfied with any answer. Dig until you drop.

Posts

6,670

Originally Posted by Barside

The reason I scoffed at Luca Toni is that Italian clubs have a history of holding back their youth players, unless you're a truly prodigious talent the chances of breaking into a Serie A side before you're 23/24 was & still is quite low.

Luca Toni wasn't held back. He bumbled about in the lower leagues as a first-teamer early-on in his career, before moving to Serie B and Serie A and displaying solid, if unspectacular performances. Then he hit 30 in 47 in Serie B and never looked back.

I guess my reason for scoffing, much like your post about him being an average Serie A player prior to 2004 was off base in terms of Luca Toni, might be a better example than I initially gave credit for, possibly similar to Ian Wright were the talent was there but the attitude was not right.

I think a certain little scuffle that got out of hand stalled a good part of Matthew's career & I'm not sure how much early the awards you mention were given out.

We'll agree to disagree on Luca Toni.

Wiki update: Matthews was the first ever winner of the European Footballer of the Year & Football Writer's Footballer of the Year awards, talk about trying to portray the facts in a way to suit your position & of course his lack of winners medals is largely down to the way people approached a career in football before the 1960's.

NO weird portrayl of the facts at all. He was born in 1915 and didn't win a majorly recognised award until his late 30's. I know he had a bizzarre career.

But still. It's a good point.

Who knows, Ramsey could have a career of average unrecognised ability and when he hits 30's he might get an award who knows.

He might not ever get a balon d'or or writers players of the year or anything.

But you seem, most of you to be missing the point. What, in all honesty, have we seen in Ramsey that would lead anyone to believe that he has the potential to become the very best, the absolute best, player in the world? That is what a -10 PA is for. I mentioned Xavi & Iniesta as they are the benchmark. They are the best midfielders in the world right now.

A -10 is, or at least should be, reserved for a player that has the potential to be the best player in the world. I don't see how anyone can argue that Ramsey has ever shown that potential. He never has. He played a year in the championship championship and has then spent the large parts of his career out injured.

All the players you have listed, should any of them ever have been given a -10? Platt, Berbatov, Adams etc, all good ​players, perhaps even great players. None of them, not one, could or would be classed as potentially the best player in the world.

But you seem, most of you to be missing the point. What, in all honesty, have we seen in Ramsey that would lead anyone to believe that he has the potential to become the very best, the absolute best, player in the world?

He has very similar stats to that xavi and iniesta exhibited up to when they were 21.

And there's nothing saying he will become the very best. He has the potential to though.

All the players you have listed, should any of them ever have been given a -10? Platt, Berbatov, Adams etc, all good ​players, perhaps even great players. None of them, not one, could or would be classed as potentially the best player in the world.

You're telling me that Wright was not the best striker of his generation? Or Platt not the best midfielder of his?

Or perhaps at some point that something didn't click in Luca Toni's career to make him the best player in Italy?

There's a difference of becoming a good player, a very good player, a world class player, and a legend.

A lot of people I mentioned never went down as legends. Some did though. And those who did, were kinda late to the party.

So who knows what Ramsey has to offer? Perhaps we'll see a 170 or a 200 PA in reality.

But for now, we have no way to tell. He's definitely not an average player. He's got something.

He has very similar stats to that xavi and iniesta exhibited up to when they were 21.

And there's nothing saying he will become the very best. He has the potential to though.

Really?

By the time Xavi was 21 he had already played 97 league games for Barcelona and had played in the Olympics and the World cup.

Iniesta had played 87 league games and was the best player for the spannish under-16 team that won the European championship. He also played for the under-19 tournament a year later. He was also in the Spain full squad at the world cup at 21.

So tell me how he has exhibited simlar stats please?

He has shown no evidence of having the potential to be the very best. He should go onto become a good, perhaps even a very good player (baring injury and illness), but not the best.

By the time Xavi was 21 he had already played 97 league games for Barcelona and had played in the Olympics and the World cup.

Iniesta had played 87 league games and was the best player for the spannish under-16 team that won the European championship. He also played for the under-19 tournament a year later. He was also in the Spain full squad at the world cup at 21.

So tell me how he has exhibited simlar stats please?

He has shown no evidence of having the potential to be the very best. He should go onto become a good, perhaps even a very good player (baring injury and illness), but not the best.

By the time Xavi was 21 he had already played 97 league games for Barcelona and had played in the Olympics and the World cup.

Iniesta had played 87 league games and was the best player for the spannish under-16 team that won the European championship. He also played for the under-19 tournament a year later. He was also in the Spain full squad at the world cup at 21.

So tell me how he has exhibited simlar stats please?

Ramsey has played 67 league games for Arsenal, 27 for other clubs, and has spent a year out injured (probably equivalent to about 15 league matches given Fabregas was there last year- doubtless he'd have been used to rest Wilshire a bit though). He is the captain of his country and arguably Wales' best player. On the other hand, Wales are not Spain. Frankly international achievements are irrelevant because the nations they represent are so different.

No.You said Ian Wright was the best striker of his generation. You also said David Platt was the best midfielder. Just highlighting better Strikers and Midfielders. Okay a couple of full backs and a goalkeeper, but the rest stand. Wright and Platt were never the best.

No.You said Ian Wright was the best striker of his generation. You also said David Platt was the best midfielder. Just highlighting better Strikers and Midfielders. Okay a couple of full backs and a goalkeeper, but the rest stand. Wright and Platt were never the best.

It potentially potentially rates him above Messi, it potentially potentially rates him as no better than Carrick or Cambiasso.

I don't think Ramsey is very likely to be a genuine great like Xavi. There is a small possibility, but more likely he'll just be very, very good. I like negative PAs because they give a range of possible PAs, I'd like it even more if the likes of Ramsey were more likely to receive a PA at the low end of their range, and if players were less likely to come close to their PAs.

When Van Persie was Ramsey's age, did anyone think he'd be the second best striker in the world? Not counting Ronaldo as he is still more of a winger. Maybe some people did, but he was largely overshadowed by Arsenal's other attacking players, aside from one brilliant goal against Charlton. Maybe he had a 1/20 chance of being as good as he is now, maybe 1/10, maybe even 1/5. He made it. For that reason, I'd like talented players like Ramsey but also others around the world to have the chance to become 180-ish players rather than have a PA set in the 160s or 170s. The problem now is that as well as the system not being ideal, Ramsey is the exception rather than the rule.

It potentially potentially rates him above Messi, it potentially potentially rates him as no better than Carrick or Cambiasso.

I don't think Ramsey is very likely to be a genuine great like Xavi. There is a small possibility, but more likely he'll just be very, very good. I like negative PAs because they give a range of possible PAs, I'd like it even more if the likes of Ramsey were more likely to receive a PA at the low end of their range, and if players were less likely to come close to their PAs.

When Van Persie was Ramsey's age, did anyone think he'd be the second best striker in the world? Not counting Ronaldo as he is still more of a winger. Maybe some people did, but he was largely overshadowed by Arsenal's other attacking players, aside from one brilliant goal against Charlton. Maybe he had a 1/20 chance of being as good as he is now, maybe 1/10, maybe even 1/5. He made it. For that reason, I'd like talented players like Ramsey but also others around the world to have the chance to become 180-ish players rather than have a PA set in the 160s or 170s. The problem now is that as well as the system not being ideal, Ramsey is the exception rather than the rule.

Couldn't agree more but at the moment it is the reason I think Ramsey having a -10 is wrong. If he has it then there should be a whole load more youngsters given a -10.

Eugene, can I point out that David Platt was playing Division 1 football by the time he was 21, this was after his spell at Crewe following his release from Manchester United, he was hardly late in getting to the top tier of English football & you need to get past the myth that he was rescued after a decade on the football scrapheap.

Also & this is aimed at both you & davehanson, since when did the definition of a players ability boil down to their stats? As has been mentioned in the Moneyball thread football is probably one of the least stat friendly sports out there & all this comparing of player X at 21 to player Y at 21 based on goals/appearances is if I'm honest quite laughable.

Ramsey has bags of natural talent but a -10 PA player? Nope, -9 at best & even then I'm probably being rather generous.

Eugene, can I point out that David Platt was playing Division 1 football by the time he was 21, this was after a 3 year spell at Crewe after his release from Manchester United, he was hardly late in getting to the top tier of English football

Also & this is aimed at both you & davehanson, since when did the definition of a players ability boil down to their stats? As has been mentioned in the Moneyball thread football is probably one of the least stat friendly sports out there & all this comparing of player X at 21 to player Y at 21 is if I'm honest quite laughable.

Ramsey has bags of natural talent but a -10 PA player? Nope, -9 at best & even then I'm probably being rather generous.

He was a late bloomer to the top division, Platt.

All we have is a player stats. Appearances is really what I'm getting at. Nobody knew Iniesta or Xavi would be top players. But Ramsey has played roughly identical if not more league games than them. Ramsey might be a world class player, he might not. All I know is he's playing for a top team at Arsenal.

Why not a -10? What makes you say that. Maybe his performances in the next few years will change that up or down or whatever. But for now, he's doing as well "statiscally" as Xavi and Iniesta.

Can I point out - I don't think he'll be a world class player. Or better than Xavi or Iniesta. But I don't see why potentially he cannot be?

I always thought that 150 was the mark of an excellent top division player, giving someone a 170-200 range pretty much guarantees that they will be a world class player in FM, with a -10 he's pretty much nailed on to be a 176-194 player as he is equally unlikely to be a 170-175 as he is to be a 195+

Originally Posted by Eugene Tyson

He was a late bloomer to the top division, Platt.

No he wasn't & any suggestion otherwise is utterly ludicrous, since when was making your Div 1 (top division in 1988) debut at the age of 21 a late start? Were you even around & watching the game on a regular basis in the late 80's?

There's a small possibility that a player was going to be as good as Pele but it happened.

Can't you see - some players excel way past their expectations sometimes.

Why can't Ramsey?

And he has NOT got the potential to be better than Messi in EVERY game. He has a PA of -10 which is between 170 and 200.

No surprise Messi is 199.

In every save, Ramsey will not be better or have the potential to be better than Xavi, Iniesta, or Messi.

Only in some saves.

Oh my head hurts. He has the potential to be the best player on the game. Regardless of what the game will set him up as when you load it up. That can't be right.

You ask why can't Ramsey? I would say I have seen nothing of him in an Arsenal shirt that would justify him having the potential to be a great player. I have seen honest, solid play, and based on that I would say his ability will lead him to become someone like Carrick/Milner/Parker. I would also say he has got so many games due to Arsenal's lack of options in central midfield.

I'm not an Arsenal fan. I'm not English and I'm not Welsh. I'm not biased.

Carrick, who has run United's midfield this year and been one of their best players.

Parker who has captained England and Spurs, and been bloody good for both.

Milner hasn't been great this year I'll admit. But, then you said Wright was the best player of his generation when he didn't start at Arsenal til he was what? Milner is only 25 so going by that he could have a PA of 200 as well? Don't see why not.

Yeh, that you're wrong that a player of 21 years of age can't at sometime, based on relative stats to both Xavi and Iniesta, to be a world class player.

You ask why can't Ramsey? I would say I have seen nothing of him in an Arsenal shirt that would justify him having the potential to be a great player. I have seen honest, solid play, and based on that I would say his ability will lead him to become someone like Carrick/Milner/Parker. I would also say he has got so many games due to Arsenal's lack of options in central midfield.

Tell me what you see in Ramsey that leads you to believe he will be world class.

He has already played the same amount of games for Arsenal as Xavi and Iniesta has played for Barca, by the age of 21.

Fact he keeps getting picked? Because he's good?

I've said this already.

AGAIN, not heard why you think he's not good enough?

Okay, he is good. I don't think anyone has said he isn't. But he is getting games for Arsenal who don't exactly have the greatest midfield, at the moment, in the world.

If Arsenal had Viera, Overmars, Pires, Ljunberg & Gilberto do you think he would have played as many games as he had done? Games to be honest are irrelevant, it is what you do in them, the ability and potential you show that deifnes how people percieve you.

Okay, he is good. I don't think anyone has said he isn't. But he is getting games for Arsenal who don't exactly have the greatest midfield, at the moment, in the world.

If Arsenal had Viera, Overmars, Pires, Ljunberg & Gilberto do you think he would have played as many games as he had done? Games to be honest are irrelevant, it is what you do in them, the ability and potential you show that deifnes how people percieve you.

Do you think he might have tried harder? Or less hard to break into the team?

Do you think he might have tried harder? Or less hard to break into the team?

It's an impossible question to answer.

I ain't sure ain't that has to do with ability to be honest. On current ability would he have played more or less games with that kind of midfield compared to now? I would say definately less. In fact Wenger said that he played more games than he would have liked him to play since coming back from his injury due to a lack of other options.